Citations

Abstract Background: Mammographic density (MD) is a strong breast cancer risk factor. We previously reported associations of percent mammographic density (PMD) with larger and node-positive tumors across all ages, and estrogen receptor (ER)–negative status among women ages <55 years. To provide insight into these associations, we examined the components of PMD [dense area (DA) and nondense area (NDA)] with breast cancer subtypes. Methods: Data were pooled from six studies including 4,095 breast cancers and 8,558 controls. DA and NDA were assessed from digitized film-screen mammograms and standardized across studies. Breast cancer odds by density phenotypes and age according to histopathologic characteristics and receptor status were calculated using polytomous logistic regression. Results: DA was associated with increased breast cancer risk [OR for quartiles: 0.65, 1.00 (Ref), 1.22, 1.55; Ptrend <0.001] and NDA was associated with decreased risk [ORs for quartiles: 1.39, 1.00 (Ref), 0.88, 0.72; Ptrend <0.001] across all ages and invasive tumor characteristics. There were significant trends in the magnitude of associations of both DA and NDA with breast cancer by increasing tumor size (Ptrend < 0.001) but no differences by nodal status. Among women <55 years, DA was more strongly associated with increased risk of ER+ versus ER− tumors (Phet = 0.02), while NDA was more strongly associated with decreased risk of ER− versus ER+ tumors (Phet = 0.03). Conclusions: DA and NDA have differential associations with ER+ versus ER− tumors that vary by age. Impact: DA and NDA are important to consider when developing age- and subtype-specific risk models. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 24(5); 798–809. ©2015 AACR.

ABSTRACT Several recent studies suggest that obesity may be a risk factor for fracture. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between body mass index (BMI) and future fracture risk at different skeletal sites. In prospective cohorts from more than 25 countries, baseline data on BMI were available in 398,610 women with an average age of 63 (range, 20–105) years and follow up of 2.2 million person-years during which 30,280 osteoporotic fractures (6457 hip fractures) occurred. Femoral neck BMD was measured in 108,267 of these women. Obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) was present in 22%. A majority of osteoporotic fractures (81%) and hip fractures (87%) arose in non-obese women. Compared to a BMI of 25 kg/m2, the hazard ratio (HR) for osteoporotic fracture at a BMI of 35 kg/m2 was 0.87 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85–0.90). When adjusted for bone mineral density (BMD), however, the same comparison showed that the HR for osteoporotic fracture was increased (HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.09–1.23). Low BMI is a risk factor for hip and all osteoporotic fracture, but is a protective factor for lower leg fracture, whereas high BMI is a risk factor for upper arm (humerus and elbow) fracture. When adjusted for BMD, low BMI remained a risk factor for hip fracture but was protective for osteoporotic fracture, tibia and fibula fracture, distal forearm fracture, and upper arm fracture. When adjusted for BMD, high BMI remained a risk factor for upper arm fracture but was also a risk factor for all osteoporotic fractures. The association between BMI and fracture risk is complex, differs across skeletal sites, and is modified by the interaction between BMI and BMD. At a population level, high BMI remains a protective factor for most sites of fragility fracture. The contribution of increasing population rates of obesity to apparent decreases in fracture rates should be explored. © 2014 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Frontotemporal degeneration (FTD) encompasses a spectrum of related neurodegenerative disorders with behavioral, language, and motor phenotypes for which there are currently no effective therapies. This is the second of two articles that summarize the presentations and discussions that occurred at two symposia in 2011 sponsored by the Frontotemporal Degeneration Treatment Study Group, a collaborative group of academic and industry researchers that is devoted to developing treatments for FTD. This article discusses the current status of FTD clinical research that is relevant to the conduct of clinical trials, and why FTD research may be an attractive pathway for developing therapies for neurodegenerative disorders. The clinical and molecular features of FTD, including rapid disease progression and relatively pure molecular pathology, suggest that there are advantages to developing drugs for FTD as compared with other dementias. FTD qualifies as orphan indication, providing additional advantages for drug development. Two recent sets of consensus diagnostic criteria will facilitate the identification of patients with FTD, and a variety of neuropsychological, functional, and behavioral scales have been shown to be sensitive to disease progression. Moreover, quantitative neuroimaging measurements demonstrate progressive brain atrophy in FTD at rates that may surpass Alzheimer's disease. Finally, the similarities between FTD and other neurodegenerative diseases with drug development efforts already underway suggest that FTD researchers will be able to draw on this experience to create a road map for FTD drug development. We conclude that FTD research has reached sufficient maturity to pursue clinical development of specific FTD therapies.

Frontotemporal degeneration (FTD) is a common cause of dementia for which there are currently no approved therapies. Over the past decade, there has been an explosion of knowledge about the biology and clinical features of FTD that has identified a number of promising therapeutic targets as well as animal models in which to develop drugs. The close association of some forms of FTD with neuropathological accumulation of tau protein or increased neuroinflammation due to progranulin protein deficiency suggests that a drug's success in treating FTD may predict efficacy in more common diseases such as Alzheimer's disease. A variety of regulatory incentives, clinical features of FTD such as rapid disease progression, and relatively pure molecular pathology suggest that there are advantages to developing drugs for FTD as compared with other more common neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer's disease. In March 2011, the Frontotemporal Degeneration Treatment Study Group sponsored a conference entitled “FTD, the Next Therapeutic Frontier,” which focused on preclinical aspects of FTD drug development. The goal of the meeting was to promote collaborations between academic researchers and biotechnology and pharmaceutical researchers to accelerate the development of new treatments for FTD. Here we report the key findings from the conference, including the rationale for FTD drug development; epidemiological, genetic, and neuropathological features of FTD; FTD animal models and how best to use them; and examples of successful drug development collaborations in other neurodegenerative diseases.